I agree with Roscoe that the DC resistance of the VC largely makes damping factor a myth unless the amp has significantly higher output impedance than the the coil resistance. If you have servo drive it is an entirely different issue because the servo can drive the amp output to greater voltage levels than would be dictated based on a fixed gain to put enough current through the voice coil to make the cone behave.
However after that, digital, or for that matter any active crossovers have huge advantages over passive designs. Ask David Berning the size, cost, and complexity of the passive crossover he used for his sub. Even after that he had to use an active EQ to get the balance correct. Passive crossovers among other things are susceptible to non linear impedance in the driver in the crossover region. If the impedance were non linear (gosh, I could hardly imagine that

) the slope of the crossover would also be non linear. With an active crossover, any low output impedance amp would not care about that and the point and slope would be as desired. Eliminating all the non linearities and other problems with crossover resistors, capacitors and inductors which are absent in an active configuration greatly lowers signal degredation. DSP also allows other controls not specifically related to the prime crossover function such as time delays, phase shifts, and often parametric EQ and dynamic EQ. I have not built a passive crossover in perhaps 40 years. They are just too difficult, expensive, and limiting. There are some very good passive crossovers out there but they are hugely more expensive than an active solution even given the cost of extra amps. BTW another advantage of active solutions is the reduction in IM distortion in the amps because they handle narrower bandwidths.
When using active crossovers and directly powering each driver care must be used to prevent DC in the mid and high drivers. With passive crossovers capacitors block DC in those regions. Woofers are still at risk in either case.
Tom